Battlefield series snags over 25 million players in the last 12 months, as EA calls the next entry "one of the most ambitious projects" in their history.
Battlefield 2042, the next entry in DICE's series of big, noisy multiplayer shooters, is set in a grim vision of the future where climate change has irreparably ravaged the planet and everyone is divided, angry, and depressed. So basically like the world today, but with more robot dogs. The series didn't always take itself so seriously, though.
Back in the spring of 2010, EA's flagship studio launched Bad Company 2, a delightfully silly, self-aware shake-up of the series' established formula that not only had an infectious sense of fun, but was a killer FPS in its own right. Some honestly don't think there's been a better Battlefield since.
It depends on what you're looking for. Destruction was far better in BC2 (it was consistently a real gameplay factor) and the maps were better designed for Rush.
Arica Harbour is a good example of a map that would feel very different as a match progressed as buildings around you were getting decimated.
BF3 had planes, bigger maps and the ability to go prone so I'd understand why some would prefer it. They are different.
Battlefield Bad Company 2 was the best hands down. I have been craving for that level of destruction for a long time. Its sad how they choose to dial it back over the years instead of going head strong into giving us more destruction. That was the one game that kept camping to a minimum.
I liked the gunplay, movements, camera work besides all the sound and various improvements of BF3.
There's a lot more than just planes, bigger maps and going prone. I enjoyed BC2 but BF3 felt like a big upgrade.
For multiplayer, possibly. Bad Company had a better campaign than Bad Company 2 though.
I personally enjoy Battlefield 2 more than any of the others.
The first Bad Company had the only good campaign of the whole BF series imho. All others just felt generic and tacked on to appease console manufacturers. I just recently replayed the BC campaign and it was brilliant. Thoroughly underrated game that one.
Nah. There's a reason people used to always plead for a Bad Company 3 even after those games released - destruction ... which was massively toned down in BF3 and BF4. It was 90% reduced to just being a gimmick.
Rush is also at its best in BC2, and it has fantastic, chaotic maps with very little downtime. I still like BF3 a lot but BC2 was pure fun. BF4 was alright but most of the launch maps were fairly weak.
If you prefer BF3 and BF4, fair enough, but there's plenty of reasons to prefer BC2. They're different.
but the SP campaign suck! BFBC2 had a good SP campaign and great MP
In the first episode of Wassup Conversation, Johan Söderqvist, composer of Battlefield 1, V talks about the process of making music for the latest Battlefield games.
Damn right it was. Infact I really liked the campaign and all the music that went with it. Well thought out. The tank mission was a blast!
If you consider AI that just drives out in the open a blast then more power to you....I thought it was a cliched story “wait we is da baddies” AGAIN, the AI is dumb as bricks and I beat it on hard in under 40 minutes. It was pretty boring.
Sorting the good from the bad (company), these are our picks for the best Battlefield games of all time
For me Battlefield 1942 is my fav, and best overall. Would be nice if DICE remastered this in the new engine and expansions that came with it. I know it would sell a ton.
I don't think it would. As much as I agree with you on it being great (it's one of my all time favorite multiplayer games), I don't know that its systems would work in today's market. For instance, the class system is totally static; there are no guns artificially locked away that you have to "earn." I prefer this, but I feel like modern players who have no frame of reference for the pre-COD4 era of FPS games would think a lack of a progression system is boring.
Possibly you meant that something like this would be added, but by remaster I took you to mean changes in the graphics/physics/engine etc. rather than game systems.
Plus I'd be wary of them touching 1942 again after the disappointing 1943.
I’ve never liked he concept of every army using every gun available. I find it ridiculous. Seems only “hardcore” games use proper equipment per team these days.
Well, yes, graphics/physics/engine etc. They can also bring it up to modern standards, like how BF4, and now V will be like, with unlocks, progression system etc.
Battlefield 2 for me it was first large scale mp battles
when i first fired it up and my pc could run it I went and spent over £100 on keyboard just to play the game
Flying a troop carrier to the mainland with 6 pals in the back and one in a cobra alongside I got goose bumps.... happy days
They got it right, Nothing was better then Bad Company 2 and sadly since DICE doesn't know why it was so good we will never get a Battlefield like that game ever again.... For the first time ever I don't even think I will buy this one, Battlefield V just looks like a Battlefield 1 reboot...So I guess I'm done, it was nice while it lasted...
I will never give my money to them again. Showe it up ....
Every BF is the most ambitious. Their ambition is to successfully screw over the BF fan base with mtx. They pull you guys with pretty graphics then they reveal their true intentions and screw up lol. EA are sad.